House OKs Anti-Gay Marriage Bill

defending the First Amendment against the Christian right ...

... because if Jews don't speak out, they'll think we don't mind

Web JewsOnFirst

Optional Member Code

Please email us
(click here)
catcher@JewsOnFirst.org

And "bookmark" us at
JewsOnFirst.org

Jews on First
P.O. Box 33821
Washington DC 20033

310-553-1146

House OKs Anti-Gay Marriage Bill

Legislation would strip federal judges of right to review whether a state that bars gay marriages must accept such marriages from another state.

By Richard Simon, Los Angeles Times, July 22, 2004

Washington -- The Republican-controlled House today approved a bill that would strip federal judges of authority to hear challenges to a law allowing states to decide whether to recognize same-sex marriages sanctioned by another state.

The White House-backed measure was approved on a largely party-line vote of 233-194. It faces an uncertain fate in the Senate, which last week scuttled a proposed Constitutional amendment barring gay marriage.

Kevin Cathcart, executive director of Lambda Legal, a gay and lesbian legal group, said the House measure "clearly violates our Constitution and will never be allowed to stand."

Supporters of the Marriage Protection Act argued that it was needed to prevent "activist" judges from striking down a provision of the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act that says that no state is required to recognize as valid a same-sex marriage sanctioned by another state.

The measure's passage was spurred by a lawsuit filed this week by a lesbian couple wed in Massachusetts seeking to have their union recognized in Florida.

Democrats accused Republicans of pushing the bill to whip up social conservatives to turn out for President Bush in the fall election.

The bill's opponents - including several black lawmakers - argued that it could set a dangerous precedent that could lead to efforts to limit courts' power to hear civil rights cases.

"While every other American will continue to enjoy the checks and balances that come from three branches of government, the Republicans have decided that if you are gay, you should be able to get along with just two branches of government," said Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.).

Supporters of the bill said the measure was a response to gay marriages in San Francisco and other places set off by a ruling by Massachusetts' highest court earlier this year permitting same-sex marriages in that state.

Supporters disputed that the legislation would deny gays their day in court, saying it provides that challenges to the federal law dealing with whether states must recognize same-sex marriages sanctioned by other states must be heard in state court.

Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said the bill would prevent "unelected, lifetime-appointed federal judges from taking away from the states their right to reject same-sex marriage licenses issued elsewhere if states so choose."

While some legal scholars have questioned whether the measure is constitutional, Sensenbrenner contended that Congress has the authority "to prevent overreaching" by the other branches of government.

The legislation, which needs only the approval of simple majorities of both houses of Congress and President Bush, has been proposed as an interim step toward a constitutional amendment, which must be approved by two-thirds vote of both chambers of Congress and ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures.

"They couldn't amend the Constitution last week. So they're trying to desecrate and circumvent the Constitution this week," Rep. James McGovern (D-Mass.) argued.

Some Democrats contend that the measure was designed to give political cover to Republicans who oppose gay marriage but are uneasy about amending the Constitution.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a leading supporter of the constitutional amendment, said he believes the best strategy for dealing with gay marriages is the amendment and predicted that support for an amendment would increase should more courts legalize same-sex marriage.

GOP leaders are expected to bring the constitutional amendment to the House floor this fall.

Fair Use Statement: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.